# Interactive Dialogue Agents via Reinforcement Learning on Hindsight Regenerations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.05194 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.05194/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 11 of its 66 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 Nov 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)
- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [Preference alignment for recommenders and RAG](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/preference-alignment-for-recommenders-and-rag/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Conservative Q-Learning for Offline Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.04779/) (2020)
- [Off-Policy Deep Reinforcement Learning without Exploration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.02900/) (2018)
- [MOPO: Model-based Offline Policy Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.13239/) (2020)
- [Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.10862/) (2021)
- [Way Off-Policy Batch Deep Reinforcement Learning of Implicit Human Preferences in Dialog](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.00456/) (2019)
- [Offline Reinforcement Learning with Fisher Divergence Critic Regularization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.08050/) (2021)
- [Persuasion for Good: Towards a Personalized Persuasive Dialogue System for Social Good](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.06725/) (2019)
- [Offline RL for Natural Language Generation with Implicit Language Q Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.11871/) (2022)
- [Prompting and Evaluating Large Language Models for Proactive Dialogues: Clarification, Target-guided, and Non-collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13626/) (2023)
- [Prompt-Based Monte-Carlo Tree Search for Goal-Oriented Dialogue Policy Planning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13660/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [A Comprehensive Survey in LLM(-Agent) Full Stack Safety: Data, Training and Deployment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.15585/) (2025)
- [A Survey on LLM-based Conversational User Simulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.24977/) (2026)
- [DIAL: Direct Iterative Adversarial Learning for Realistic Multi-Turn Dialogue Simulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.20773/) (2025)
- [Affective Flow Language Model for Emotional Support Conversation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.08826/) (2026)
- [Principled Fine-tuning of LLMs from User-Edits: A Medley of Preference, Supervision, and Reward](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.19055/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent progress on large language models (LLMs) has enabled dialogue agents to generate highly naturalistic and plausible text. However, current LLM language generation focuses on responding accurately to questions and requests with a single effective response. In reality, many real dialogues are interactive, meaning an agent's utterances will influence their conversational partner, elicit information, or change their opinion. Accounting for how an agent can effectively steer a conversation is a crucial ability in many dialogue tasks, from healthcare to preference elicitation. Existing methods for fine-tuning dialogue agents to accomplish such tasks would rely on curating some amount of expert data. However, doing so often requires understanding the underlying cognitive processes of the conversational partner, which is a skill neither humans nor LLMs trained on human data can reliably do. Our key insight is that while LLMs may not be adept at identifying effective strategies for steering conversations a priori, or in the middle of an ongoing conversation, they can do so post-hoc, or in hindsight, after seeing how their conversational partner responds. We use this fact to rewrite and augment existing suboptimal data, and train via offline reinforcement learning (RL) an agent that outperforms both prompting and learning from unaltered human demonstrations. We apply our approach to two domains that require understanding human mental state, intelligent interaction, and persuasion: mental health support, and soliciting charitable donations. Our results in a user study with real humans show that our approach greatly outperforms existing state-of-the-art dialogue agents.